Verdicts mixed for Little

Labour Party leader Andrew Little has been cleared of defaming Lani Hagaman but could yet face another trial after the jury ruled he did defame her husband Earl in one case.

The jury, in the High Court in Wellington, did not get to the point of ruling on damages.

After more than 13 hours of deliberations across two days, the nine men and three women found by a majority verdict that Little had not defamed Lani Hagaman in any of the six statements he made about a Niue hotel deal.

It ruled Earl Hagaman had been defamed in one of the statements.

However, because it could not reach a decision on whether the defence of qualified privilege applied to Little – in essence, whether he had abused his public duty to provide comment as Leader of the Opposition – they did not get to the point of deciding on any damages.

The jurors ruled one of Little’s statements was not defamatory of Earl Hagaman and could not reach a majority verdict on the four remaining statements.

The Hagamans were seeking $2.3 million in damages for comments Little made about a $101,000 donation they made to the National Party during the 2014 election, and a contract their Scenic Hotel Group won a month later to manage the Matavai resort in Niue, which receives government funding.

The verdict came after the jury indicated it could not reach a unanimous verdict after discussions on Friday and Monday.

Justice Karen Clark encouraged the jury to reach a unanimous decision but then to reach a majority decision if possible.